Eric Holder: Voter ID laws hurt minorities

Under increasing pressure from civil rights groups to take action against a wave of state voter identification laws, Attorney General Eric Holder issued a public warning Tuesday that the new laws could disenfranchise minority voters, but he stopped short of promising the broad legal crackdown many activists are seeking.

“It is time to ask: What kind of nation and what kind of people do we want to be? Are we willing to allow this era — our era — to be remembered as the age when our nation’s proud tradition of expanding the franchise ended?” Holder said in a speech at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum in Austin, Texas.

Text Size

-

+

reset

This year, eight states have passed laws that require voters to show identification at the polls. Two of those states, South Carolina and Texas, need so-called pre-clearance from the Justice Department or a court, which has not yet been granted. Some states are also rolling back early voting options and adding new registration procedures, while others are imposing rules that could make it more difficult for college students and the elderly to vote.

Critics complain that the measures will have a disproportionate impact on minorities and the poor and are aimed at suppressing turnout of voters who tend to support Democrats. Supporters generally cite a need to fight fraud, though some have on occasion admitted seeking to discourage voting by specific groups, such as students.

Holder suggested that the new voter ID laws are unnecessary but was vague about what action the Justice Department plans to take against them, particularly in those states free to craft election procedures without the prior approval from the DOJ or the courts required by the Voting Rights Act. Under Section 5 of that law, most parts of nine states and a smattering of other counties and towns with a history of election-related discrimination must apply to the Justice Department or a court for permission to change voting procedures.

“Since January, more than a dozen states have advanced new voting measures. Some of these new laws are currently under review by the Justice Department, based on our obligations under the Voting Rights Act,” Holder said. “Although I cannot go into detail about the ongoing review of these and other state law changes, I can assure you that it will be thorough — and fair. We will examine the facts and we will apply the law.”

Holder’s message seemed as much a public exhortation to fight voter ID laws as a vow that the Justice Department would take action to block them.

“Speak out. Raise awareness about what’s at stake,” Holder said. “Call on our political parties to resist the temptation to suppress certain votes in the hope of attaining electoral success and, instead, encourage and work with the parties to achieve this success by appealing to more voters. And urge policymakers at every level to re-evaluate our election systems — and to reform them in ways that encourage, not limit, participation.”

In his remarks, Holder addressed the question of voter fraud that has been cited repeatedly by advocates of the new state laws such as Republican state Sen. Troy Fraser, a sponsor of Texas’s voter ID law, who said at the time the bill was passed: “Voter impersonation is a serious crime, but without a photo ID requirement, we can never have confidence in our system of voting.”

Holder said he prosecuted voter fraud cases earlier in his career but that “in-person voting fraud is uncommon.”

“We must be honest about this,” he said.

Holder’s speech followed a private meeting he held recently where civil rights leaders expressed a growing impatience with the Justice Department’s failure to act against the new laws, especially those in states that don’t require prior clearance from the department or the courts, according to sources who participated in the sessions.

“We were very concerned about the lack of enforcement from the Department of Justice,” said Barbara Arnwine of The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “We have expected more from them in terms of voting rights. … We reviewed how many cases civil rights groups were bringing versus the number of cases brought by DOJ.”

Asked about the message delivered to the attorney general, Arnwine said: “It was that they were not doing enough. … We said that this was his watch.”

Readers' Comments (256)

The only people who do not want voters to supply identifcation when voting are those who want to destroy this country. Personally I think this country made a grave mistake when they allowed people to vote who were not property owners. Since the late 60's many have used the system to further their political agenda. There was a time when an employee only had to advise an employer of how many was in his family, not anymore, with the morals in this country being what they are, everyone has to provide proof, as in the end to many were including their aunties as thier dependents!

The USSC "upheld Indiana’s voter-identification law on Monday, declaring that a requirement to produce photo identification is not unconstitutional and that the state has a “valid interest” in improving election procedures as well as deterring fraud."

"In a 6-to-3 ruling in one of the most awaited election-law cases in years, the court rejected arguments that Indiana’s law imposes unjustified burdens on people who are old, poor or members of minority groups and less likely to have driver’s licenses or other acceptable forms of identification. Because Indiana’s law is considered the strictest in the country, similar laws in the other 20 or so states that have photo-identification rules would appear to have a good chance of surviving scrutiny."

How can a requirement for voter ID hurt minorities?? Simply showing an ID at the polling place is going to prevent minorities from voting...how the hell does that work? It hurts people who cannot verify their identity and voter qualifications. This proves the Dimocreeps are relying on voter fraud to keep them in power. They will destroy this country to keep their damned perks and privileges.

Holder was a lost cause with the black panther voter intimidation turn away. He is ineffective and a waste of tax payers monies. Suing America for ideology. Killing Americans for prestige. A loser, through and through.

Allegations of "voter fraud" are much hyped and way overstated; in other words, a lot of BS believed by the ignorant. Throughout the states, GOP-dominated legislatures have worked to limit voters' access, which may effectively disenfranchise as many as 5 million people ( Brennan Center for Justice http://www.brennancenter.org/c... )

Allegations of "voter fraud" are much hyped and way overstated; in other words, a lot of BS believed by the ignorant. Throughout the states, GOP-dominated legislatures have worked to limit voters' access, which may effectively disenfranchise as many as 5 million people ( Brennan Center for Justice http://www.brennancenter.org/c... )

From your link:

Photo IDs Permitted

Prior to voting, a voter must provide one of the following valid forms of photo ID to an appropriate election official:

There's no way to know. No one knows how many people never get caught. Currently, in many states the potential for voter fraud is extremely high, however, and relatively easy. A more logical system will help ensure that voters are not fraudulent.

The idea that minorities, who wrote the book on welfare applications, cannot get voter ID, is overhyped and way overstated.

Furthermore, minorities are not the only ones to whom voter fraud would be beneficial. Caucasians can commit voter fraud, too. In fact, Caucasians may be braver about attempting voter fraud than minorities. No one knows for sure, since up to now there has not been a good mechanism to screen for it. Many elections have been on the "honor system"--the same way much of our country's border operates.

You would think that even Democrats would want to be assured that elections are honest.